I posed this question, Should Singapore consider a 12/13-year compulsory education, where every Singaporean pays no fees for ITE, Polytechnics and JCs?
The Singapore education system is divided into primary schools, secondary schools (middle schools), junior colleges (preparatory high schools), polytechnics and Institutes of Technical Education, also known as ITEs. ITE graduates go on to polytechnics, whereas polytechnic and junior college graduates go on to universities. For the purpose of my question, I assume that the education system does not discriminate between technical and academic education, with an overall skills framework, I think this lengthened compulsory education scheme might work out. Also, I also assume the State gives free education from primary schools up to pre-university levels, and maintain current top-notch quality across all sectors of education.
The answers I got was, no, this only lengthens suffering for some people, particularly the people with special needs (e.g. people with autism, AD/HD, dyslexia, etc).
Education in Singapore could be such a suffering, that dropout rates for people with special needs are higher than those without special needs significantly. I myself dropped out (though re-enrolled in another university soon afterwards, after thinking about it), and most Aspies in Singapore I know do drop out of their schools, too. An extended public education system, up from the current 6 years to a possible 12 or 13, will hurt Aspies and other Singaporeans with special needs, because many of them will be structurally unemployed based on presumed education requirements in all Singapore citizens.
However, I think the strengths outweigh the weaknesses in extended public education.
Perhaps dropouts should be given remedial education to be up to a certain technical skill, like say, passing a lower-level ITE course with reasonable accommodations that still fit into industrial requirements, to meet the skills needed for a public-funded 12-year education system. I worry that we do not give free education, students with special needs from poor families especially will be discouraged to do the best they can in studies, to develop their critical thinking, communication and numerical skills that could help them in their career. Especially so, if they're smart but just unfortunate, to develop late, and are born to parents of low socio-economic statuses.
A fellow friend said it is the case in Germany to provide free education across all levels, even including university. However, from my personal experience, I think most jobs in Singapore do not require university education, though they may need some form of expertise provided in Polytechnics. If not, why Polytechnic graduates seem to always beat out University graduates for even graduate-level jobs? In addition, Singapore's polytechnics are so good, they even produce students who can do Master's degrees straight after graduating from Polytechnic.
Not that Singapore's universities are any 'bad', it's just that some time has to settle before assessing the full impact of a free 13-year education from primary school to graduation from Polytechnic course (that is, 6 years in primary schools, 4 years in secondary schools if there are no significant learning issues, and 3 years in Polytechnics).
We may look up to Germany, where all levels of education are free and state-supported. Indeed, if universal free education the case in Germany, where local companies and the government co-pay all employee training (and not employees), this would make a stable society in the face of globalisation. All Germans are part of a firm-government employment network.
No surprise, Germany did better than Britain and America in the current Great Financial Crisis, which is expected to last very, very long. Those who thrive today run on much more sustainable growth.
For people with special needs who attend mainstream schools, an extended compulsory education will mean a minimum job competency, presumed to be up to job requirements (due to close cooperation with employers), that they have when they graduate. This will be good for their skills.
The Singapore education system is divided into primary schools, secondary schools (middle schools), junior colleges (preparatory high schools), polytechnics and Institutes of Technical Education, also known as ITEs. ITE graduates go on to polytechnics, whereas polytechnic and junior college graduates go on to universities. For the purpose of my question, I assume that the education system does not discriminate between technical and academic education, with an overall skills framework, I think this lengthened compulsory education scheme might work out. Also, I also assume the State gives free education from primary schools up to pre-university levels, and maintain current top-notch quality across all sectors of education.
The answers I got was, no, this only lengthens suffering for some people, particularly the people with special needs (e.g. people with autism, AD/HD, dyslexia, etc).
Education in Singapore could be such a suffering, that dropout rates for people with special needs are higher than those without special needs significantly. I myself dropped out (though re-enrolled in another university soon afterwards, after thinking about it), and most Aspies in Singapore I know do drop out of their schools, too. An extended public education system, up from the current 6 years to a possible 12 or 13, will hurt Aspies and other Singaporeans with special needs, because many of them will be structurally unemployed based on presumed education requirements in all Singapore citizens.
However, I think the strengths outweigh the weaknesses in extended public education.
Perhaps dropouts should be given remedial education to be up to a certain technical skill, like say, passing a lower-level ITE course with reasonable accommodations that still fit into industrial requirements, to meet the skills needed for a public-funded 12-year education system. I worry that we do not give free education, students with special needs from poor families especially will be discouraged to do the best they can in studies, to develop their critical thinking, communication and numerical skills that could help them in their career. Especially so, if they're smart but just unfortunate, to develop late, and are born to parents of low socio-economic statuses.
A fellow friend said it is the case in Germany to provide free education across all levels, even including university. However, from my personal experience, I think most jobs in Singapore do not require university education, though they may need some form of expertise provided in Polytechnics. If not, why Polytechnic graduates seem to always beat out University graduates for even graduate-level jobs? In addition, Singapore's polytechnics are so good, they even produce students who can do Master's degrees straight after graduating from Polytechnic.
Not that Singapore's universities are any 'bad', it's just that some time has to settle before assessing the full impact of a free 13-year education from primary school to graduation from Polytechnic course (that is, 6 years in primary schools, 4 years in secondary schools if there are no significant learning issues, and 3 years in Polytechnics).
We may look up to Germany, where all levels of education are free and state-supported. Indeed, if universal free education the case in Germany, where local companies and the government co-pay all employee training (and not employees), this would make a stable society in the face of globalisation. All Germans are part of a firm-government employment network.
No surprise, Germany did better than Britain and America in the current Great Financial Crisis, which is expected to last very, very long. Those who thrive today run on much more sustainable growth.
For people with special needs who attend mainstream schools, an extended compulsory education will mean a minimum job competency, presumed to be up to job requirements (due to close cooperation with employers), that they have when they graduate. This will be good for their skills.
